Fall colors Inverted

[sk66]

My question is does this "work"?
I took the picture with the plan to flip it vertically and use the reflection. While doing the editing I felt there wasn't enough of the trees in the reflection so I included some of the actual trees at the bottom. To me, I think it works, but perhaps less than ideal. Maybe I should have included more of the trees and less of the reflected sky?
What do you think?

Camera Nikon D3
Exposure 0.001 sec (1/1000)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 640
Exposure Bias 0 EV

[navcom]

Ooooo....risky! LOL!!

I like it! It almost looks like a painting with a real photograph reflection!...juxtaposition!

[dcclark]

I absolutely agree... this has a very oil-painting-esque feel to it.

I would normally comment on the aperture... you could easily have gone to f/9 or f/10... but I don't see any need for it, really. The photo is more about the motion and blur of the water, which is very well done.

Quibble #1: I think that it's slightly crooked. The shoreline looks a little tilted to me. Of course, it's hard to tell...

Quibble #2: I feel like the bottom (clear) part of the trees is almost unnecessary. I'm mixed on this, but it might be neat if you cropped out some (not all) of that part. Give it a try, see if you like the effect.

Great job, keep it up!

[RichardTaylor]

Love the sky, however the "blurry" trees make my old eyes go funny.
+ smile

[sk66]

Originally Posted by dcclark

I absolutely agree... this has a very oil-painting-esque feel to it.

I would normally comment on the aperture... you could easily have gone to f/9 or f/10... but I don't see any need for it, really. The photo is more about the motion and blur of the water, which is very well done.

Quibble #1: I think that it's slightly crooked. The shoreline looks a little tilted to me. Of course, it's hard to tell...

Quibble #2: I feel like the bottom (clear) part of the trees is almost unnecessary. I'm mixed on this, but it might be neat if you cropped out some (not all) of that part. Give it a try, see if you like the effect.

Great job, keep it up!

Thanks,

I actually chose the wider aperture to extend DOF (hyperfocal) since I was working with close reflections (2 ft) and the far shoreline (100 yds or so).

The image is quite level but not perfect. I tried to balance the actual shoreline and the treetops (horizon line)...biggest issue is I wasn't able to get 100% perpendicular to the far shoreline, I tried.

I tried cropping out the real trees...that was my original idea. It made the fall colors a sliver when sticking with the 4x5 format and it was just unbalanced...Don't know why I was hung up on that format though.

Here it is re-cropped so that it "works"..(rule of thirds etc)


I Like it!
Not sure it's better, but it is different and at least as good IMO.

[sk66]

BTW, is it apparent enough that it's a reflection and not some "watercolor" preset?

[dcclark]

I think that the variation in textures (such as the differently sized reflections, and different directions) indicate that it's real water reflections.

Looking at the cropped version... I'm not sure. I do like it (and the "busy" clear trees in the original are gone, which is cool), but it's less clear what it is. Also, I really really liked the DEEP blue of the "upper" sky, which got cropped out.

Still, way cool.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by sk66

Thanks,

I actually chose the wider aperture to extend DOF (hyperfocal) since I was working with close reflections (2 ft) and the far shoreline (100 yds or so).

What was I thinking????
The short focal length helps, but the wide aperture doesn't...guess I got lucky there.

[Sterling]

Ha! I was about to throw a "say what?" toward that comment.

[boun]

I love the crop it's perfect, really!